From: Federico klez Culloca <klez@mes3hacklab.org>
To: libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
Subject: Re: Is Stallman nuts?
Date: Sun, 15 Sep 2019 21:54:48 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <F9465C96-1B0C-4A3D-845A-02674DE33202@mes3hacklab.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <212703708.736295.1568576403580@connect.xfinity.com>
Il 15 settembre 2019 21:40:03 CEST, MARY-ANNE WOLF <mgwmgw@comcast.net> ha scritto:
>Let me make sure that I understand the distinction that is being
>claimed here. A young lady who is in fact young enough to be below the
>age of giving sexual consent "presents herself as being willing" to
>Epstein, an adult man aged over 21. This happens with multiple
>underage girls on more than one occasion.
>
>So if Epstein has sex with each underage girl after she "presents
>herself as being willing", are you arguing that statutory rape has not
>occured? If so, on what grounds?
>
>If it were one girl, we could debate whether Epstein believed that the
>young lady was older than was the case. If we are talking about
>multiple underage girls, using an airplane named "The Lolita Express"
>that becomes much less plausible. I think we can assume he knew how
>young they were.
>
>So if a girl too young to give sexual consent tries to do so, and an
>adult male repeatedly acts as if he believes that she is old enough to
>give consent, does her action get him off the hook? I do not think so.
>And if this happens with girl after girl after girl after girl?
>Really?
>
>If you believe that statutory rape did occur, then what does presenting
>herself as willing have to do with it? Why bring that up? Legally
>speaking, she was raped, no matter what she said first.
>
>So how is Stallman not trying to excuse statutory rape by what he
>posted?
>
>Mary-Anne
>
>
>> On September 15, 2019 at 2:46 PM Michael Downey <michael@downey.net>
>wrote:
>>
>>
>> I have not read the commentary articles, nor do I intend to. I have,
>on the other hand, read the comments by the FSF President and Board
>member on the mailing list in question. They are entirely inappropriate
>comments for someone in his public position to be making.
>>
>> I spend my day job trying to convince large governments and NGO's of
>the value of free software. Once again they see the FSF leader behaving
>inappropriately and I have to make excuses for him and the organization
>that continues to provide him safe harbor, and explain that they don't
>represent the values of the free software movement.
>>
>> I'm exhausted of doing that. The board has had many opportunities to
>remove him from his role yet each time back down.
>>
>> As a single individual associate member, I can't do much. But I can
>(and have) revoked my 15+ year membership and am removing all
>references to the FSF in materials from my day job. We just can't be
>associated with that kind of public behavior any more.
>>
>> The letter I sent to the FSF follows. I'll be unsubscribing from this
>mailing list too, unfortunately, but encourage others to reconsider
>their support until the board acts in a way true to its public charter.
>For the sake of software freedom, I hope my absence is short-lived.
>>
>> - Michael
>>
>> FSF associate member #2352 (since 2004-05-20) here. I also accepted
>the Free Software Award for Projects of Social Benefit several years
>ago.
>>
>> It’s unfortunate to hear yet another incident about the FSF
>President’s unacceptable behavior in the news again.
>>
>> Despite all the good things this organization does, this continued
>behavior while holding the role makes it untenable for me to publicly
>support the FSF. And that’s a bad thing for software freedom.
>>
>> Software freedom is an important human right, but if one has to
>publicly trample others’ human rights in order to get there, one
>undermines one’s own cause.
>>
>> With his continued behavior over the years, Stallman has done damage
>to our movement that will take a very long time to repair. It’s time
>for him to step down and let the next generation lead this critical
>movement into the future.
>>
>> Should he be unwilling to do so, I note that based upon my review of
>the FSF bylaws, the Board has the power to remove the person in office
>of President with or without cause upon vote of the board. (Article VI,
>Section 7.)
>>
>> Until that time, I must regrettably cancel my associate membership.
>>
>> /s/
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
>> _______________________________________________
>> libreplanet-discuss mailing list
>> libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
>> https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
>
>_______________________________________________
>libreplanet-discuss mailing list
>libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
>https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
Stallman id talking about Minsky, not about Epstein.
And I think the point he's making is that "statuatory rape" is just a legal term (as you're saying) and I'd wager that if we base morality in law in absolute terms, we're going nowhere as a society. In certain part in the US sodomy is illegal. Does it make it wrong?
I'm not saying statutory rape is right. I'm saying that one should be free to discuss whether it's right or wrong without stigma.
_______________________________________________
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-09-15 19:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 83+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-09-15 17:35 Is Stallman nuts? MARY-ANNE WOLF
2019-09-15 18:01 ` lily via libreplanet-discuss
2019-09-15 18:37 ` Thomas Lord
2019-09-15 20:20 ` Adrienne G. Thompson
2019-09-15 20:34 ` Adrienne G. Thompson
2019-09-15 20:45 ` Thomas Lord
2019-09-15 20:59 ` Adrienne G. Thompson
2019-09-16 0:53 ` No, Stallman isn't "nuts" nor does he deserve less freedom of speech J.B. Nicholson
2019-09-16 1:47 ` Steven Sullam
2019-09-16 2:35 ` Taking credit for your own choices and free software is neither anti-commercial nor anti-profit J.B. Nicholson
2019-09-16 10:19 ` No, Stallman isn't "nuts" nor does he deserve less freedom of speech Leah Rowe via libreplanet-discuss
2019-09-16 10:29 ` Leah Rowe via libreplanet-discuss
2019-09-16 10:33 ` Leah Rowe via libreplanet-discuss
2019-09-16 14:41 ` Caleb Herbert
2019-09-16 16:40 ` 'smee via libreplanet-discuss
2019-09-16 2:07 ` Eric Schultz
2019-09-17 0:18 ` quiliro
2019-09-17 6:50 ` Ole Aamot
2019-09-16 15:03 ` Adrienne G. Thompson
2019-09-20 17:26 ` Is Stallman nuts? Will Hill
2019-09-20 18:26 ` Adrienne G. Thompson
2019-09-21 22:33 ` Leah Rowe via libreplanet-discuss
2019-09-15 18:37 ` C. Cossé
2019-09-15 20:41 ` Leah Rowe via libreplanet-discuss
2019-09-15 18:46 ` Michael Downey
2019-09-15 19:40 ` MARY-ANNE WOLF
2019-09-15 19:54 ` Federico klez Culloca [this message]
2019-09-15 20:30 ` TechLibre
2019-09-15 20:37 ` Betsy Garrett
2019-09-15 20:44 ` Leah Rowe via libreplanet-discuss
2019-09-15 20:49 ` TechLibre
2019-09-15 20:53 ` Andrew Luke Nesbit
2019-09-15 19:34 ` TechLibre
2019-09-15 19:41 ` Robert Call (Bob)
2019-09-15 20:30 ` Thomas Lord
2019-09-15 22:14 ` Mark Phelan
2019-09-16 11:54 ` Patrick 'P. J.' McDermott
2019-09-16 14:54 ` Caleb Herbert
2019-09-16 16:36 ` Patrick 'P. J.' McDermott
2019-09-16 21:11 ` Adrienne G. Thompson
2019-09-16 17:49 ` Deb Nicholson
2019-09-16 20:08 ` alimiracle
2019-09-17 13:50 ` quiliro
2019-09-17 14:22 ` Adrienne G. Thompson
2019-09-17 17:04 ` Ole Aamot
2019-09-17 18:03 ` quiliro
2019-09-17 18:29 ` Danny Spitzberg
2019-09-17 19:35 ` 'smee via libreplanet-discuss
2019-09-17 20:37 ` quiliro
2019-09-22 3:47 ` Richard Stallman
2019-09-17 18:47 ` lily via libreplanet-discuss
2019-09-17 19:13 ` Thomas Lord
2019-09-17 19:23 ` Aaron Wolf
2019-09-17 21:13 ` Caleb Herbert
2019-09-17 23:29 ` A. Mani
2019-09-19 4:34 ` Richard Stallman
2019-09-19 11:52 ` A. Mani
2019-09-19 14:32 ` Adrienne G. Thompson
2019-09-20 4:47 ` Richard Stallman
2019-09-18 5:30 ` Joel Holder
2019-09-17 19:22 ` Adrienne G. Thompson
2019-09-17 20:27 ` quiliro
2019-09-18 0:00 ` Leah Rowe via libreplanet-discuss
2019-09-18 0:03 ` Leah Rowe via libreplanet-discuss
2019-09-18 0:04 ` Leah Rowe via libreplanet-discuss
2019-09-18 0:23 ` Caleb Herbert
2019-09-18 0:59 ` Leah Rowe via libreplanet-discuss
2019-09-18 1:12 ` Adrienne G. Thompson
2019-09-18 4:35 ` quiliro
2019-09-18 5:28 ` Isaac David
2019-09-18 15:42 ` Caleb Herbert
2019-09-18 23:13 ` Leah Rowe via libreplanet-discuss
2019-09-19 1:57 ` Caleb Herbert
2019-09-19 0:25 ` Leah Rowe via libreplanet-discuss
2019-09-19 0:28 ` Leah Rowe via libreplanet-discuss
2019-09-19 0:37 ` Diplomatic activism [was Re: Is Stallman nuts?] Aaron Wolf
2019-09-21 19:52 ` Leah Rowe via libreplanet-discuss
2019-09-18 23:44 ` Is Stallman nuts? Adrienne G. Thompson
2019-09-19 0:31 ` Leah Rowe via libreplanet-discuss
[not found] <mailman.1435.1568576087.2187.libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org>
2019-09-16 22:12 ` Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
2019-09-16 22:20 ` Dr. Tom McKellips
[not found] <mailman.1925.1568747595.2189.libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org>
2019-09-17 20:05 ` Cinder Roxley
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2019-09-18 2:49 Jeffrey Haines via libreplanet-discuss
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=F9465C96-1B0C-4A3D-845A-02674DE33202@mes3hacklab.org \
--to=klez@mes3hacklab.org \
--cc=libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).